section 1 - envcomm.orgenvcomm.org/pdf/section1.pdf · as educators have long believed (hines,...

Fundamental Concepts in Environmental Education andCommunication (EE&C)

Section 1

3

Knowledge alone doesn’t harm or help the

environment.

Human attitudes don’t harm or help the

environment.

Human behaviors, on the other hand, have

greatly harmed, yet hold a great deal of hope for

helping, the environment. Those of us who work

for environmental sustainability must address

human behavior.

Behaviors, of course, must be supported by

knowledge and attitudes. But research in the field of

environmental education and in commercial mar-

keting have shown that there is no cause-and-effect

progression from knowledge to attitude to behavior

as educators have long believed (Hines, Hunger-

ford, and Tomera, 1987). In fact, the relationship

among these three things is puzzling.

Research shows that people who take positive

environmental actions often have no better under-

standing of the problem than those who don’t act.

In the United States, national opinion polls show

consistently strong positive attitudes toward the

environment, yet most of these Americans still

won’t do simple things to conserve energy and

water. What does cause people to act? What can

we as educators say or do to get people to behave

in environmentally responsible ways?

The Environmental Education and Communica-

tion Project (GreenCOM) was started six years ago

by USAID to apply a set of social marketing and com-

munications techniques that have proven successful in

the field of health to the field of environment. Green-

COM has had the opportunity to make use of some

of these new strategies in 28 countries. This book

shares both the theories behind the communications

techniques and some of the practical results.

GreenCOM draws on four complementary dis-

ciplines and works closely with practitioners in

these four fields: social marketing, environmental

communications, environmental education, and

public participation. Many GreenCOM projects,

as described in the case studies in chapters 13–15,

blend elements of these fields into workable meth-

ods on the ground. But the four fields do not sim-

ply offer a cafeteria of strategies; each has its own

framework and logic. This chapter gives a brief

background on these four fields that form the

strands of GreenCOM’s strategies.

STRAND 1: SOCIAL MARKETINGIn a relatively new field collectively referred to as

social marketing, models derived from commercial

marketing and behavioral psychology are used to

encourage new (healthier, more environmentally

friendly) behaviors in groups of people. Social mar-

keting relies on behavior modification theory as its

base and identifies key factors that determine the

behaviors of target audiences. These “determi-

nants” may operate at the individual, family, com-

munity, or system levels. This framework suggests

communicators consider a range of ways of mak-

ing the new behavior desirable and accessible to the

target population by looking at barriers to, and

benefits of, their adoption.

GreenCOM uses a form of “social marketing”

that involves a simple five-step process that we feel

will bring about environmental behavior change. It is

divided into sections corresponding to the five basic

steps of social marketing (Day & Smith, 1996).

The first step—Assessment—identifies why the

people you want to influence behave the way they

H A N D B O O K F O R I N T E R N A T I O N A L P R A C T I T I O N E R S

Chapter 1GreenCOM Weaves Four Strands

Martha C. Monroe, Brian A. Day, and Mona Grieser

4

do. People almost always have good reasons for

doing what they do. They are not stupid nor are

they often irrational. People need to be empowered

to take action. Some small fraction of the audience

may already carry out the behaviors we want a

larger portion of the population to do. Knowing

what people think and why they act the way they

do can pinpoint a problem and identify the right

way to solve it. What are the differences between

doers and non-doers? When possible we want to

build on what people are already doing correctly.

We are looking for opportunities to develop

appealing messages that make the desired behavior

sound fun and easy. We are also learning what their

sources of information are so we can select a

medium for communicating these messages.

In the design and planning step, we take what

we learned from the assessment step, compare it to

our goals, and design our message. Based on what

we learn about doers and non-doers we attempt to

identify what might motivate people to stop or

start a specific behavior—conserve water, dispose

of waste correctly, or take steps to protect critical

wildlife habitat. When designing a message we try

to remember to find an incentive for people to do

(or not do) the behavior. Every person in one form

or another asks, “What’s in it for me?” Our mes-

sage must clearly answer that question. Applied

research provides insights into the benefits and bar-

riers that people perceive about the proposed

behavior. We conceive a message and prepare a

draft script, storyboard, or rough tape to convey

the message in terms that people can readily relate

to. But we do not go into production yet.

In the pre-test and revise stage we actually test

our draft campaign items with a small subset of the

target audience. In one project GreenCOM worked

on in Egypt, we took a draft message out to 40

people to see if the message was effective. (The

tested message was what the “experts” believed

people should hear rather than one based on mar-

keting research.) We found that 39 out of 40 peo-

ple with whom we pre-tested the materials did not

understand the message. Pre-testing can save enor-

mous amounts of money and time.

After revising, and even re-pre-testing if neces-

sary, it is time to implement.

Here we look back at our research or where our

audiences get information and we deliver our mes-

sages through those channels.

Monitoring and evaluation are critical. Chang-

ing behavior doesn’t happen overnight. As people

are exposed to new behaviors they often seek addi-

tional information. Campaigns need to be

reworked to speak to those needs. Which media are

being helpful or effective? Do we need to change

the media mix? Figure 1.1 shows step 5 pointing

back to a point between steps 2 and 3. Progress is

made in a spiral with constant revisions, new

pretests, and further evaluations.

STRAND 2: ENVIRONMENTALCOMMUNICATIONDrawing on social marketing theories, described

above, as well as experience in communication

programs in other sectors (e.g., health, family plan-

ning, and AIDS), environmental communicators

create strategies for reaching certain audiences,

they develop messages and select the appropriate

media to reach these audiences.

E N V I R O N M E N T A L E D U C A T I O N & C O M M U N I C A T I O N F O R A S U S T A I N A B L E W O R L D

3Pre

test

&Revise

Design

&

Plan

2 1

Implem

ent

4

Assess

5 Monitor & Evaluate

Figure 1.1 The Steps of Social Marketing for

Creating Behavior Change

5

Communications campaigns are varied, multi-

faceted, highly planned, and strategically assem-

bled media symphonies designed to increase

awareness, inform, or change behavior in target

audiences. A model for designing communications

campaigns uses these four steps:

1. First, set a clear goal. What exactly do we

want people to do? Which behavior do we

want to focus on and why? Environmental

practices often involve a myriad of behaviors.

Which of these should be the focus of our

efforts?

2. Then select the audience that can have the

most impact and focus on it.

3. Learn that audience’s “media diet.” What

media does the target audience get its infor-

mation from—radio, TV, newspaper, commu-

nity bulletin boards, their doctor, boss, or

children?

4. Only then can we focus on message. A mes-

sage written for a community bulletin board

is quite different—and could be more effec-

tive in changing behavior— than one written

for TV.

These four steps: Goal, Audience, Medium,

Message must stay in order.

STRAND 3: ENVIRONMENTALEDUCATIONGreenCOM also draws heavily on the tradition of

environmental education. Since the 1970s, envi-

ronmental education has been characterized as a

process that prepares citizens to prevent and solve

environmental problems. Delegates to the 1977

United Nations Intergovernmental Conference on

Environmental Education in Tbilisi, Georgia in the

former USSR acknowledged the various aspects of

environmental education when they agreed upon

the following definition:

Environmental education is a process ofdeveloping a world population that is awareof and concerned about the total environ-ment and its associated problems, and which

has the knowledge, skills, attitudes, motiva-tions and commitment to work individuallyand collectively toward solutions of currentproblems and the prevention of new ones(UNESCO, 1978).

The delegates identified five objectives of envi-

ronmental education programs:

Awareness—to acquire an awareness and sen-

sitivity to the total environment and its allied

problems.

Knowledge—to gain a variety of experiences in,

and acquire a basic understanding of, the environ-

ment and its associated problems.

Attitudes—to acquire a set of values and feelings

of concern for the environment and motivation for

actively participating in environmental improve-

ment and protection.

Skills—to acquire the skills for identifying and

solving environmental problems.

Participation—to encourage citizens to be actively

involved at all levels in working toward resolution of

environmental problems (UNESCO, 1978).

Environmental education is mission-oriented. A

good environmental education program does not

stop with the presentation of information, but

helps learners wrestle with values and gain the

skills to take relevant and responsible action.

Formal environmental education differs from

social marketing and environmental communica-

tions in that it does not always directly target spe-

cific behaviors. It teaches students “how to think”

not “what to think.” Thus the goal of environmen-

tal educators is to help learners form the capacity

to collect and analyze information, make good

judgments, and participate fully in civic life.

Because research shows that people who take

action not only have some knowledge and aware-

ness of the problem they are addressing, but also

knowledge of how to effect change, environmental

educators often stress civic and public participation

skills. The goal is to instill in learners the knowl-

edge about the environment, positive attitudes

toward the environment, competency in citizen

action skills, and a sense of empowerment.


The goal is to instill in learners the knowledge about the environment, positive attitudestoward the environment, competency in citizen action skills, and a sense ofempowerment.

6

Environmental education materials and pro-

grams reflect an evolution from science-based

information to skill-based participation in problem

solving. In some nations, environmental education

objectives nicely complement education reform

efforts to make subject areas more relevant to local

situations and to prepare students to become

responsible citizens.

Environmental education activities are easier to

start in the nonformal education system, through

youth group activities, religious communities,

extension visits, agency outreach materials, and

field visits to museums and zoos. Environmental

educators develop and implement programs that

engage learners in discovering information and

developing skills to convert that information to

meaningful practice.

In some nations, environmental education has a

third important aspect: training professionals to

consider the environment in their work. Through

training, engineers, architects, business leaders, leg-

islators, planners, and other decision-makers in

society come to understand how environmental

principles and concepts affect their work in hous-

ing, water treatment, transportation, urban devel-

opment, automobile manufacturing, and other

spheres (see Chapter 10).

STRAND 4: PUBLIC PARTICIPATIONThe growing democratization around the world

clearly shows the growing desire of people to par-

ticipate in decisions that affect them. In Eastern

Europe, the former Soviet Union, Latin America,

Asia, and Africa the news of the past two decades

has been of increased control of people over their

governments.

Participation by local residents and stakeholders

changes policy. It also makes policy more likely to

be effective. The need for public participation is a

basic tenet of GreenCOM’s strategies. And com-

munication and education techniques can enhance

the effectiveness of people or groups seeking to

participate.

The complexity and specificity of environmental

issues also makes participatory techniques impor-

tant tools. Today it is less likely that outside

experts will have the answer.

With a growing community wariness of consul-

tants, governments, and authority in general, it is

paramount that residents design their own commu-

nication strategy and messages. Their participation

not only improves the program and adds credibility,

but also strengthens their skills to do similar work

in the future (see Chapter 3). Participatory materi-

als development workshops and participatory

research efforts are but a few of the new tools that

ensure greater participation by stakeholders in envi-

ronmental communication activities. The result can

be improved quality in a considerably shorter time

than would be needed by experts to familiarize

themselves with issues, actors, and behaviors.

Participation in communication activities is not

just a matter of including local stakeholders in the

design of a project, but also partnering with them

in the collection of formative research data (see

Chapter 6), decision making, and program imple-

mentation. The degree to which participation

increases local capacity to initiate and manage sim-

ilar programs at a later time may be the true mea-

sure of success (see Chapter 13).

These new approaches are also changing the

nature of the communication tools themselves.

With greater authority for managing programs

devolving to decentralized agencies and community

groups, larger numbers of people are being trained

to use new communication techniques effectively.

Their techniques include: community resource cen-

ters, community radio, and community websites.

References

Day, B.A. and W.A. Smith. (1996.) The Applied BehaviorChange (ABC) Framework: Environmental Implications,Advances in Education, pp. 5–9.

Hines, J.M., H.R. Hungerford and A.N. Tomera (1986–1987).“Analysis and synthesis of research on responsible environ-mental behavior: A meta analysis.” The Journal of Environ-mental Education 18(2), 1–8.

UNESCO. (1978.) Final Report, Intergovernmental Confer-ence on Environmental Education, organized by UNESCOin cooperation with UNEP, Tbilisi, USSR, 14–26.


7H A N D B O O K F O R I N T E R N A T I O N A L P R A C T I T I O N E R S

One woman sorts household waste for recycling;

the other throws it into a garbage container bound

for the landfill. Why?

Do non-recyclers need more information in

order to recycle? Do they need a monetary incen-

tive? Or do they simply not understand the link

between trash and groundwater quality? Are re-

cyclers motivated by the wisdom from frugal grand-

parents, or peer pressure from their neighbors?

If you are in charge of a recycling program, you

will think long and hard about these two behav-

iors. This chapter is meant to guide thinking about

recycling—or any other activity to improve the

environment—toward an effective and efficient

program.

For years, communicators have tried to identify

the factors that determine behavior (determinants

of behavior) to explain why people behave differ-

ently. A variety of theories have been proposed, but

no one model explains all human behavior.

Why does one woman recycle when the other

doesn’t? Perhaps one woman perceives the “cost”

of recycling (in time, convenience, or space) to be

inconsequential, while the other finds it over-

whelming. Or perhaps the recycler gets support for

her efforts from people she values—family, neigh-

bors, or community leaders—while the non-

recycler does not. Maybe the recycler is willing to

take the time, effort, and space to do something she

believes to be right, but the non-recycler does not

have that discipline. These three broad cate-

gories—external barriers, social personal norms,

and personal values—form the basis for consider-

ing a variety of determinants of behavior.

Since in the real world these categories overlap

and interact in patterns that vary from person to

person, issue to issue, and place to place, it is not

practical to defend one “best” theoretical model

for developing behavior-change programs. In this

chapter a variety of theories that explain different

facets of behavior will provide us with a “mosaic

model” to use in designing EE&C programs.

The design of any activity should include the

basic steps outlined in Chapters 6–9, beginning

with the needs assessment and formative research

phases. But to ask the right questions and to then

build a program that will address the most impor-

tant determinants of behavior, start with this sim-

ple question: “Why do you do that?”

FOCUSING ON BEHAVIORSSuccessful EE&C focuses on behaviors for several

reasons:

1. The behaviors of individuals have environ-mental repercussions.

To change the state of our environment, we

must learn how to encourage individual behaviors

that are environmentally sound and alter those that

are damaging to the environment.

2. Awareness that an environmental problemexists does not necessarily lead to behavior tofix the problem—as we saw with our twowomen above.

Often, EE&C interventions focus only on devel-

oping awareness about environmental problems.

But awareness is only a first step. Awareness that

forests are diminishing does not get enough forest

users to adopt appropriate silviculture practices or

to reduce the consumption of firewood. Awareness

that sea turtles are diminishing does not convince

enough people to harvest fewer sea-turtle eggs.

Chapter 2Thinking about Behavior

Orlando Hernández and Martha C. Monroe

8

Many factors other than awareness influence

behavior, and those factors must be understood.

An analysis of the behaviors that individuals cur-

rently perform, both beneficial and detrimental to

the environment, is the starting point to under-

standing which programs should be supported and

which changed.

3. Adopting this behavioral approach makesEE&C activities more focused and targeted,and ultimately more effective.

Resource users know best how rapidly their

resources are diminishing. But they may not have

the ability to correct the problem—they may need

alternative specific behaviors, training in the skills

to perform these behaviors, and then the opportu-

nities to use them. Identifying the effective alterna-

tive behaviors will help identify the skills and train-

ing they need. For example, an Andean program

attempting to stabilize agriculture and prevent

encroachment into forest areas suggested that

farmers limit burning when preparing the ground

for cultivation. Farmers knew that biodiversity was

affected by clearing more land and understood the

importance of burning only the land they intended

to plant. But they needed the skills to burn small

patches of land in a controlled manner; skills such

as opening fire breaks and burning into the wind.

Training in these skills then supports environmen-

tally friendly behaviors.

4. EE&C techniques work well in involvingmultiple stakeholders—organizations, agen-cies or individuals.

For example, urban waste collection involves

several stakeholders: waste generators, waste han-

dlers, waste disposers, neighborhood associations,

government technicians, elected local and central

government officials, and residents. The solution to

waste-collection problems needs to involve all

these actors. Residents, for example, need to recy-

cle, to reduce the amount of waste transported

from the neighborhoods to the landfill. Neighbor-

hood associations need to promote recycling and

help households transport their waste to a central

collection point. This may require hiring waste col-

lectors and charging for services provided to house-

holds. Drivers of municipal garbage trucks need to

keep good records for their vehicles in order to pre-

vent vehicle breakdown and avoid service disrup-

tion. Elected municipal officials need to obtain

funds to increase staff assigned to waste collection.

Identifying behaviors of each stakeholder helps to

define action plans and distribute responsibilities

accordingly.

WHAT IS A BEHAVIOR?Behavior is what people do. People perform a host

of environmentally appropriate and inappropriate

behaviors everyday.

GreenCOM defines behavior as a single, observ-

able action performed by an individual. Although

the behavior may be performed by habit, it could

also be the outcome of a conscious decision.

Behaviors are distinguished from practices, which

are a series of related behaviors. For example, recy-

cling solid waste is an environmental practice that

can be broken down into many, separate, observ-

able, and measurable behaviors:

♦ Separating glass, cans, paper and organic

material into different containers

♦ Cleaning, tying or preparing recyclables for

pick-up

♦ Storing recyclables in appropriate containers

prior to pick-up

♦ Putting recyclables on the curb on appropri-

ate days for pick-up

Correct agro-chemical use is another environ-

mental practice, made of separate, observable,

measurable behaviors. Behaviors associated with

the use of Pesticide X may include:

♦ Storing Pesticide X out of the reach of chil-

dren and animals

♦ Using the correct amount of water to mix the

pesticide

♦ Wearing shoes that cover the foot while mix-

ing pesticide

♦ Wearing shoes that cover the foot while

applying pesticide

♦ Applying Pesticide X only when there is no

wind


9

When defining a behavior, Ajzen and Fishbein

(1980) have suggested that behaviors have four dis-

tinct elements: action, target, context and time.

The action element is the easiest to understand

because actions are associated with verbs. In the

previous list concerning pesticides, the actions were

store, use, wear, and apply. In another example

regarding a project to restrict beach use in a pro-

tected area during turtle nesting season, patrollingthe beach in a wildlife refuge to prevent poaching

is different from reporting violators of beach

boundaries. Both behaviors relate to protected area

management, but they are different behaviors.

The target element of behavior refers to the per-

son or group affected by the action. Continuing

with the beach protected area example: reporting

cousins, grandfathers, or daughters is different

from reporting unrelated violators. When the tar-

get changes, so does the behavior.

With respect to context, reporting violators of

beach boundaries to the police is different from

reporting them to a village oversight committee.

Context refers to how the action is done.

The time element of behavior implies that

patrolling the beach during the night or on week-

ends is a different behavior from patrolling the

beach during the day or workdays.

These four elements of behavior may be helpful in

specifying the behaviors that should be targeted in

an education or communication project. For exam-

ple, turtle-egg poachers may engage in a number of

poaching behaviors that are relatively different from

each other and may require vastly different messages

or techniques to alter. Consider the following:

♦ Poachers extract eggs from a beach in a pro-

tected area

♦ Poachers extract eggs from an unprotected

beach

♦ Poachers extract eggs from sections of a beach

where eggs are likely to be eaten by natural

predators

♦ Poachers extract eggs from a beach likely to

be eroded away

♦ Poachers extract eggs from a beach regularly

trampled by cattle

♦ Poachers take eggs laid during an arrivada*

Each one of these behaviors may have different

environmental impacts, different rationales, and

different predictors.

Defining specific behaviors is the crucial first

step for planning an education or communication

program. Without specific behaviors, a message

campaign on conserving fuelwood would easily

become mired in confusion and excuses for both

the message recipient and the campaign planner.

“Who should conserve fuelwood?” someone might

think. “Certainly I’m not the problem, since I only

boil water in the morning.” “Should the campaign

focus on the type of stove?” a planner will wonder.

“Why doesn’t information about tree growth rates

translate into fuel conservation?” foresters will

ask. A specific behavior helps focus the activity on

the audience and the context for the behavior.

On the other hand, environmental issues are

associated with so many specific behaviors that it

may be helpful to group them into categories and

seek common or underlying behaviors that could

form the focus of an educational or communica-

tion program.

ENVIRONMENTALLY FRIENDLY ANDUNFRIENDLY BEHAVIORSEducation and communication programs may

develop different strategies for helping people

begin or strengthen environmentally friendly

behaviors, or stop environmentally unfriendly

behaviors. Each strategy may require a different set

of motivators, depending upon the context. The

examples of recycling behaviors discussed earlier

are illustrations of environmentally friendly behav-

iors, while egg poaching is an environmentally

unfriendly behavior.

Pollution, illegal logging, illegal fishing, and

destructive farming methods are only a few of the

common problems confronted by environmentalists


*“Arrivada” is a term used in Central America for massivearrivals of nesting sea turtles to select beaches. These eventsoccur from July to January. Olive ridley sea turtles are one ofthe few species that nest in this manner.

10

and environmental educators. Unfortunately, these

unfriendly behaviors often have short-term eco-

nomic and political payoffs that encourage people

to continue. Indeed, people don’t do things without

a reason. Additional measures may be necessary to

stop or change them, such as legislation and

enforcement. Most evidence shows that enforce-

ment is much easier if accompanied by an appro-

priate education campaign to explain the need for

the new legislation.

A thorough needs assessment can determine

whether EE&C strategies should focus on environ-

mentally unfriendly behaviors, and can suggest

strategies to support the transition from damaging

to friendly behaviors. Usually a satisfactory alterna-

tive must be offered to provide the target audience

with the food or finances they obtain. Offers of

opportunities to experiment with new techniques

for growing food or preventing pollution may gen-

erate an outpouring of creative problem solving.

CRITERIA FOR SELECTING FEASIBLEBEHAVIORSEE&C programs can seek to address an enormous

number of specific behaviors. Not only could this

be time-consuming and inefficient, but also some

behaviors may be better suited to intervention than

others. GreenCOM has developed a set of criteria

to help select and prioritize “feasible” behaviors to

include in EE&C interventions. This scale has been

adapted from the health field (Graeff, Elder and

Booth, 1993; Green, Kreuter, Deeds and Partridge,

1980) and is supplemented by the work of Ray

DeYoung in the field of conservation behavior

(1993). More guidelines for defining these target

behaviors can be found in Chapter 7.

Potential for Impact on the ProblemPrior to launching an EE&C intervention, ask

yourself whether the behaviors to be promoted

make sense technically. For example, for farmers to

make a living in arid areas, appropriate irrigation

practices are crucial. Although night irrigation is

often suggested as a solution, studies from some

desert countries show that irrigating at night may

not save as much water as other, more feasible

options. So, selecting the behaviors that make tech-

nical sense is important. It is difficult to rebuild

credibility if the previous campaign was technically

incorrect.

Sometimes, a group of technicians may not

agree on the “best” behavior or environmental

solution. In these cases, you need to field test solu-

tions in relevant and appropriate settings. Water

conservation techniques in the United States may

not conserve water in Jordan, because water pres-

sure may be reduced, or other elements in the sys-

tem are different. Evidence from field trials is

essential to decide on appropriate behaviors.

Exploring solutions from the technical perspec-

tive also implies that every relevant arena should be

considered. Most environmental issues are con-

nected to other problems; so one particular solu-

tion may create more problems. Before choosing a

behavior, determine if that behavior might have

negative consequences in other areas. For example,

in El Salvador a behavior that environmentalists

considered appropriate was “heating the family’s

food only once a day.” This practice would limit

the amount of firewood consumed and reduce

deforestation. However, reheating children’s food

immediately before consumption is necessary to

reduce the contamination that causes infant diar-

rhea. Although once-a-day-cooking would have a

positive impact on deforestation, this behavior

could have a devastating effect on infant health.

Immediate and Obvious Consequences forBehaviorsBehaviors that have immediate positive conse-

quences or bring tangible benefits are likely to be

adopted more easily than those that generate dis-

tant benefits. For example, families who conserve

water may perceive the immediate consequence of

a lower water bill. It would be more difficult for

families with their own well to perceive the effects

of water conservation at the end of the month. By


11

the same token, supporting fish hatcheries that

stock fish for sportfishing is an easier behavior for

fishermen than supporting legislation that

improves fish habitat.

Similarly, while environmentally unfriendly

behaviors may be stopped if appropriate sanctions

are defined, made public, and enforced; it may be

easier and more effective to substitute an environ-

mentally friendly behavior than to completely

eradicate an unfriendly one.

People like to get quick feedback from their

behavior. Programs that seek changes for

long-term, far-away, tenuous benefits (e.g., reduc-

ing automobile use to prevent global climate

change) are less successful than programs that pro-

vide economic or health benefits within a year.

Consider choosing behaviors that offer feedback

mechanisms, or designing proxies for feedback that

will encourage a similar behavior (e.g., car exhaust

testing to curb air pollution).

Compatibility With Cultural Norms orCurrent PracticesBehaviors proposed also need to make socio-cul-

tural sense. For example, in many cultures, high

consumption of electricity and water is an accept-

able social norm, especially among the middle and

upper classes. People feel that they have worked

hard to obtained their income and deserve to con-

sume all the resources they can afford. They may

construe conserving electricity and water as incom-

patible with their socio-cultural norms.

Cost: Time, Money, and EffortAvoid behaviors that are costly for target audi-

ences. Cost may be measured in terms of time,

money, and effort.

Recycling, for example, could have a high cost

in terms of time—sorting, storing, bagging and dis-

posing of waste. In this case, other ways for reduc-

ing the time demands need to be identified.

The behaviors chosen also need to make finan-

cial sense. For example, residents may refuse to

recycle waste if the municipal program requires

them to forego the income they would have

received by selling materials to scavengers. Conse-

quently, organizing a recycling program with scav-

engers (an existing recycling program of sorts) may

be more acceptable than organizing one with

municipal waste collectors. Either way, recycling

happens, but the scavenger approach is more

attractive to the public and therefore gets more

cooperation.

Complexity: Keep it SimpleProposed behaviors need to be simple. Participants

may need to break them into elements or steps to

learn or practice the skills one at a time. For exam-

ple, many of the behaviors required for sustainable

agriculture, such as contour farming, live fences,

composting, and crop rotation, are much more

complex than those performed with slash-and-

burn agriculture. Adopting these new practices will

require a significant commitment by traditional

farmers.

Generality: One Thing Leads to AnotherOften, one behavior change will lead to another. It

may be easy for people to generalize from conserv-

ing water in the household garden to conserving

bath water. However, it is not generally accepted

that people generalize from one issue to another

(successfully conserving energy doesn’t lead to

reducing waste). Whether one behavior leads to

another depends on which behaviors are chosen,

and how behavior change information is presented.

DurabilitySome behaviors “stick” better than others. If an

education or communication campaign succeeds in

changing a certain behavior, one would hope that

it is durable to the extent that, even after the pro-

gram is over, people will continue to perform the

behavior. Clearly, durability is also a function of

changes in the community, the environment, the


12 E N V I R O N M E N T A L E D U C A T I O N & C O M M U N I C A T I O N F O R A S U S T A I N A B L E W O R L D

communication message, the feedback system, and

in a variety of other dimensions. Encouraging these

supportive changes is the mark of a successful,

durable, program.

Individual Versus Group Behaviors Individuals can perform some environmental

behaviors in the privacy of their homes, such as

installing faucet flow restrictors to conserve water,

or insulating their home to conserve energy. A pro-

gram to introduce and support these behaviors

would be aimed at homeowners; and appropriate

feedback mechanisms could be directed at them.

Other environmental conditions require that a

group of people perform a behavior in order to see

real change, such as clean-up of a waterway, con-

sumer boycotts, or an awareness parade. A program

to stimulate group behavior would be designed dif-

ferently from one aimed at individual behavior, with

appropriate feedback to reflect the group effect.

INVOLVEMENT OF STAKEHOLDERSIN THE SELECTION OF TARGETBEHAVIORSBecause behaviors targeted through an EE&C

intervention should be not only technically sound

but also socially, culturally and economically

viable, the stakeholders—the beneficiaries of those

interventions—need to be involved in selecting

those behaviors. They can be asked about the

extent to which technically appropriate behaviors

can be adopted. They can also be observed and

then asked to explain why they perform some

behaviors and not others. Or, they can help decide

in group discussion with other stakeholders (e.g.,

technicians), which behaviors are appropriate for

an EE&C program to target.

CONTRASTING BETWEENPERFORMERS AND NONPERFORMERSThis is where we started, with two women, one a

recycler, the other not a recycler. Barriers and

enabling factors influence the adoption of behav-

iors. These determinants may be either external or

internal to the individuals, and are easier to identify

when comparing information from individuals per-

forming the targeted behaviors to those who do not.

Individuals performing these behaviors may be

at different stages along a behavior performance

continuum. Prochaska and DiClemente (1983)

have suggested that there may be five such stages:

Pre-contemplation, contemplation, action, mainte-

nance, and advocacy (see Table 2.1).

Individuals at any stage may be motivated to

move to the next stage by a message unique to that

stage. Thus, a message to insure maintenance

behavior will be different from a message designed

to promote contemplation. Rather than appealing

to the experimental nature of trying something

new, maintenance messages should strengthen

existing positive consequences by eliminating or

changing negative consequences or by reminding

individuals of important information that rein-

forces their behavior (Graeff, Elder, and Booth,

1993).

Table 2.1 Stages of Behavior Performance

Name of the Stage Description

Pre-contemplation Not considering or not knowing about an environmentally friendly behavior, or actually engag-ing in an environmentally unfriendly behavior such as dynamite fishing.

Contemplation Beginning to think about adopting to changing to an environmentally friendly behavior.

Action Trying out an environmentally friendly behavior.

Maintenance Making the adopted environmentally friendly behavior a customary practice.

Advocacy Multiplying the behavior by encouraging others to do the same.

13

Not only do individuals move along a contin-

uum of awareness and willingness to perform a

behavior, but so do populations (Muth and

Hendee, 1980). As more people shift from contem-

plation to action, for example, it becomes easier for

others to move because the social norm changes

toward accepting the behavior.

MAKING IT POSSIBLE BY MAKINGIT EASY: REDUCING BARRIERSWhen social marketers take on a communication

challenge, they often first consider the context of

the behavior. What real barriers stand in the way of

people adopting this new behavior? (First and fore-

most, the behavior must be possible.) These are

external determinants—factors that affect perfor-

mance of the behavior that are external to the indi-

vidual. If recycling is not available in the munici-

pality, it does little good to promote recycling

behaviors. In comparing recyclers to others, some

external determinants might be more obvious: Do

recyclers live closer to the recycling center? Do they

have a higher income, fewer children, or a flexible

schedule that allows them to run errands when the

center is open? Thus, all the elements that come into

play when the behavior is performed are potential

opportunities for the social marketer to alter.

A message could emphasize that the recycling

center now stays open longer, or that new contain-

ers make storage of sorted recyclables easier. If time

and convenience are the major barriers to recy-

cling, the communicator might advocate a message

that changes the perception of these determinants,

such as, “it’s not so hard; kids do it.”

Clearly, the initial research to understand the

audience and their context would need to cover

questions that reveal their perception of barriers,

the reality of barriers, and the incentives that moti-

vate people (Kotler and Roberto, 1989).

Knowledge and InformationA common myth is that people don’t behave

appropriately because they don’t know better, and

therefore information is the cure for changing

behavior. If you give people the facts that excess

garbage can pollute groundwater, that rapid defor-

estation increases soil erosion, or that fishing with

dynamite destroys coral reefs, they will correct

their environmentally destructive behaviors. Cling-

ing to this myth actually limits our efforts to

change behaviors or provide the skills needed to

perform the appropriate behavior. Providing infor-

mation must be just part of a larger strategy.

Obviously, information is necessary, though not

sufficient. A study in Ann Arbor, Michigan com-

paring recyclers to non-recyclers revealed that both

groups were equally knowledgeable about the sta-

tus of the local landfill, both cared about their

garbage and their future quality of life, yet the

non-recyclers were stumped by the procedural

details of the recycling process (De Young,

1988–1989). They weren’t sure how to package

their newspapers or whether to take the labels off

the tin cans. Information was the key to converting

them to recycling behavior, but it was only the pro-

cedural information, spelling out the skills involved

each step of the way. Some people define this type

of knowledge as building the skills required to per-

form the behavior.

Similarly, a complicated recycling pickup sched-

ule in the Municipality of Quito, Ecuador was

found to affect compliance. A different type of

waste was collected every day: organic kitchen

waste on Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays; recy-

clable paper, cans, and glass were collected on

Tuesdays; and bathroom waste was collected on

Thursdays. Neighborhood residents who could not

articulate the schedule could not follow it, either.

Some residents found the rules for recycling plastic

so difficult that they did not recycle plastic at all.

Knowledge of the consequences of action or

inaction is another type of information that could

be a separate determinant and is often closely

aligned with attitudes about the future.

Information can be conveyed in the form of

prompts, reminding people to turn off the lights as

they leave a room or to fill their gas tank after sun-

set on high-ozone days (Stern and Oskamp, 1987).


What real barriers stand in the way of people adopting this new behavior? These areexternal determinants.

14

Prompts tend to be helpful only if well worded and

well placed. Their reliability declines as they lose

novelty and the new behavior tends to revert to the

old behavior once the prompt is removed

(DeYoung, 1993).

Confidence and Perceptions of Self CompetencyBandura (1977) defines perceived self-efficacy as

the judgements that one may have about one’s

capabilities “to organize and execute courses of

action required to attain designated types of per-

formances.” He is simply talking about people’s

confidence to act. He adds that people who per-

ceive themselves as highly efficacious will act, think

and feel differently from those who do not.

According to this theory, perceptions of self-

efficacy to successfully execute a desired behavior,

as well as the positive and negative outcome

expectancies of that behavior, are the key determi-

nants of behavior and, consequently, the keys to

behavior change.

Mastery of a skill by observation will lead to a

perception of self-efficacy. A person seeing similar

people successfully perform a given behavior may

believe that he or she can also do that, thus enhanc-

ing a perception of self-efficacy. Verbal persuasion

can be used to make people believe that they pos-

sess capabilities that will allow them to achieve cer-

tain objectives.

Mastery of a skill by practice is the most influ-

ential source of self-efficacy information. So,

opportunities that permit skill enhancement

through guided practice and corrective feedback

are the mark of effective behavior-change pro-

grams. Depending on the behaviors targeted by an

EE&C intervention, the promotion of environmen-

tally friendly behaviors may require the develop-

ment and/or the enhancement of appropriate skills.

Farmers may not use agro-chemicals appropriately

because they lack appropriate skills to do so. Mas-

tery of skills associated with appropriate agro-

chemical use will lead to perceptions of self-

efficacy, which in turn will help farmers perform

new behaviors. Self-efficacy may generalize to

other situations, particularly those that are most

similar to the one where self-efficacy was enhanced

(Bandura, 1986).

Perceptions About Outcomes According to Ajzen and Fishbein’s Theory of Rea-

soned Action (1980), an important determinant of

behavior is attitudes, and attitudes are a function

of a person’s salient beliefs about the consequencesof a behavior and the person’s evaluation of those

consequences. Salient beliefs are top-of-the-mind

beliefs about those consequences. The more one

believes that performing the behavior will lead to

positive consequences the more favorable the per-

son’s attitude. Conversely, the more a person

believes that performing a behavior will lead to

negative consequences (or prevent positive conse-

quences), the more negative the attitude. Individu-

als will perform behaviors about which they have

positive attitudes and avoid those about which they

have negative attitudes.

Examples of positive consequences of a behav-

ior include: obtaining fuel wood for cooking meals

for the family, obtaining medicinal plants from a

forest to cure a family member who is ill, partici-

pating in a recycling program to set a good exam-

ple for the children. Examples of negative conse-

quences of a behavior include: having to pay a fine

for disposing of garbage in an illegal dumpsite or

having to face social criticism from important oth-

ers because of reporting relatives whom have vio-

lated a fish sanctuary.

Social PressuresHumans are social organisms. We live in commu-

nities. We identify with groups. And we care about

what other people think. In some important ways,

each of us wants to belong to a group. In some

other important ways, each of us may be willing, at

certain times in our lives, to step away from the

group and do something different. The tension

between fitting in and being unique is hard to pre-


Humans are social organisms. We live in communities. We identify with groups. And wecare about what other people think.


dict and will vary from individual to individual.

Nevertheless, this continuum represents an impor-

tant set of determinants of behavior.

Since humans care about what others think,

EE&C programs can be designed to use the power

of social pressure to help change behaviors. The act

of making a commitment, such as signing a pledge,

has been shown to be an effective strategy to call

upon this type of human response to the percep-

tions of others. Participants are quite likely to

make their word good and continue the changed

behavior (Katzev, 1986; Stern and Aronson, 1984).

Education and communication programs can

use social norms to their advantage. When a mayor

offers to personally congratulate the apartment

dwellers that achieved the greatest reduction in

their energy usage, residents take pride and other

citizens take notice. When movie stars promote

certain eating habits, their fans might join them

(Monroe and DeYoung, 1994).

SUMMARYHuman behavior is a key element that both con-

tributes to, and helps resolve, environmental prob-

lems. Building a behavioral element into EE&C

programs requires that programmers work closely

with the people involved to choose the appropriate

behaviors on which to focus.

A variety of determinants help create and sup-

port behavior, so a vast collection of motivators

and messages may be available to inform and

change behavior. Experience in both health and

conservation behaviors indicates that simple, indi-

vidual behaviors (turn off lights, recycle newspa-

pers) that result in direct and immediate conse-

quences (reduced electricity bills, reduced garbage

costs) are the easiest to change. Complex, group-

based, long-term behaviors are harder to change.

Yet our environmental problems require that we

continue to teach and support environmentally

appropriate behaviors that may not have immedi-

ate rewards. The degree to which EE&C programs

can use the whole range of motivators and gener-

ate their own feedback systems will be a key to suc-

cess in changing behavior.

In this way, we can reinforce the woman who

recycles, and understand how to motivate the other

woman to become a recycler too.

References

Ajzen, I. and M. Fishbein. (1980.) Understanding Attitudesand Predicting Social Behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:Prentice Hall, Inc.

Bandura, A. (1977.) Social Learning Theory. EnglewoodCliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, Inc.

Bandura, A. (1986.) Social Foundations of Thought andAction: A Social Cognitive Theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:Prentice Hall, Inc.

DeYoung, R. (1988–1989.) “Exploring the difference betweenrecyclers and non-recyclers: The role of information.”Journal of Environmental Systems. 18: 341–351.

DeYoung, R. (1993.) “Changing Behavior and Making itStick: The conceptualization and management of conserva-tion behavior.” Environment and Behavior. 25(4): 484–505.

Graeff, J., J.P. Elder, and E.M. Booth. (1993.) Communicationfor Health and Behavior Change. San Francisco, CA: JosseyBass.

Green, L., M.W. Kreuter, S.G. Deeds, and K.B. Partridge.(1980.) Health Education Planning: A DiagnosticApproach. (2nd ed.). Mountain View, CA: Mayfield.

Katzev, R.D. (1986.) “The impact of commitment in promot-ing consumer energy conservation,” in E. Monnier, G.Gaskell, P. Ester, B. Joerges, B. Lapillonne, C. Midden, andL. Puiseux (Eds.) Consumer behavior and energy policy: Aninternational perspective. New York: Praeger.

Kotler, P. and E. L. Roberto. (1989.) Social marketing: Strate-gies for changing public behavior. New York: The FreePress.

Monroe, M.C. and R. DeYoung. (1994.) “The Role of Interestin Environmental Information: A New Agenda,” Children’sEnvironments. 11(3): 243–250.

Muth, Robert M. and John C. Hendee. (1980.) “TechnologyTransfer and Human Behavior,” Journal of Forestry, pp.141–144.

Prochaska, J.O. and DiClemente, C.C. (1983.) “Stages andprocess of self-change of smoking: Toward an an integrativemodel of change,” Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psy-chology. 51. 390–95.

Stern, P.C. and E. Aronson, Eds. (1984.) Energy Use: TheHuman Dimension. New York: Freeman.

Stern, P.C. and S. Oskamp (1987.) “Managing Scarce Environ-mental Resources,” in D. Stokols and I. Altman (Eds.),Handbook of Environmental Psychology. New York: Wiley.


The past ten years have seen a sea change in phi-

losophy regarding international development pro-

jects in general, and education and communication

projects in particular.

The new approach, inspired in part by recent

behavioral research, prominently features the word

“participatory.” Whether called “participatory

development,” “participatory learning approach,”

“participatory monitoring and evaluation,” or

“participatory rural appraisal,” the new methods

proceed from the premise that people have a right

to be part of decisions that affect their lives. The

methods are guided by the observation that local

stakeholders know better than anyone else what

their problems are and what solutions might work.

Behavioral research also shows that when people

commit to a course of action that is their idea, the

results are more likely to succeed and continue

than when ideas are imposed from the outside, or

delivered within a top-down structure.

A participatory project aims to involve as many

local stakeholders as possible in the process of for-

mulating, designing, implementing and evaluating

programs in the hope of making development self-

directing, fair, and self-sustaining. In addition, par-

ticipation aims to erase the feelings of inferiority

that stakeholders from developing countries have

often experienced in relation to their counterparts

in developed countries.

In the process, the development worker sheds

his or her status of “expert” and becomes instead a

listener and facilitator dedicated to helping stake-

holders solve their own problems. “Who’s partici-

pating in whose project?” the participatory facili-

tator may ask. And she answers: “The outsider is

actually participating in the clients’ project.” Sim-

ple as the wording may seem, it represents a radi-

cal change of perspective.

Participatory development assumes that a

diverse group of stakeholders brings sufficient wis-

dom—technical, social, and political—to produce

a sound project. Further, it assumes that a given

solution, if not technically superior to an expert’s

solution—will benefit from the commitment of the

community and will actually be enacted.

The process of participation can benefit projects

in health and infrastructure as well as environmen-

tal education. GreenCOM’s experiences are each

unique, but the lessons learned could be applied by

communication and development professionals

operating anywhere.

WHAT IS PARTICIPATION IN AN EE&CPROJECT?Examples from the GreenCOM experience demon-

strate the variety of participation in environmental

education and communication projects. Each pro-

ject brings together key actors and representatives

of key publics to research, design, implement,

and/or evaluate an intervention. Each uncovers

important facts, assumptions, and trends through

working with diverse groups of people in an atmo-

sphere of respect and discovery—and comes up

with solutions that no outside “expert” would

likely have found.

♦ In Jordan, a participatory GreenCOM work-

shop brought together representatives of stake-

holders in a school system to develop an envi-

ronmental education curriculum for school

clubs. Teachers, students, administrators,

NGO environmental education staff, scientists,

Chapter 3Participation

Mona Grieser

18

donor representatives, curriculum develop-

ment professionals, gender specialists and

communication professionals all met for two

weeks to design a water awareness curricu-

lum. GreenCOM helped NGO staff with the

preliminary formative research and later

trained them to analyze it, but the NGO per-

formed the actual research and analysis (see

Chapter 15).

♦ GreenCOM/Egypt addressed the problem

that villagers were having with decreased

waterflow in irrigation canals. The project

used video cameras to help people tell their

story to government decision-makers. These

functionaries are often so far removed from

the field and so buffered from local reality by

the reports of their own (often biased) field

staff that they are unaware of the real prob-

lems and issues affecting the final client, the

farmer. The video camera allowed the farmer,

and most importantly, the women of the com-

munity, to speak “directly” to the Minister

and his staff. The video was used to effect

institutional change in the irrigation Ministry

and make it more client-centered.

♦ GreenCOM/Nepal sponsored a participatory

video workshop in which members of com-

munity forest user groups (CFUGs) prepared

a community video letter to present their con-

cerns on forest issues to top-level government

officials. After the viewing, the government

officials provided feedback to the community

members, addressing some of their concerns.

The gender-balanced group represented castes

and ethnic groups who rarely speak together.

Using some of the tools outlined below—plus

story telling and informal walks in the forest

to significant places—the group developed

enough trust and openness to come up with

their own messages. After some video train-

ing, they articulated these with clarity and

forcefulness (see Chapter 12).

♦ In Fez, Morocco, GreenCOM worked with

the municipality of Zouagha to re-engineer

the system for collecting solid waste. Green-

COM brought to the same room all possible

stakeholders, including such disparate players

as the mayor, neighborhood residents, the

local member of Parliament, municipal staff

including truck drivers, sanitation engineers,

health professionals, representatives of com-

munity groups, solid waste experts, the direc-

tors of the solid waste program, the person

responsible for hiring personnel for the

municipality, staff of the maintenance depot

of the trucks, and GreenCOM technical

personnel.

During the two-week activity, the group

researched the solid waste system as well as the

social structure of the community, analyzed that

knowledge and came up with solutions that, while

perhaps not technically ideal, represented the

greatest consensus possible. Because of the evident

transparency of the activity, everyone concerned

felt that a milestone in cooperation and under-

standing had been achieved.

These four examples of GreenCOM activities

have much in common. They exemplify the philos-

ophy of participatory development clearly—a phi-

losophy in keeping with the democratic spirit of the

age. The activities also build local capacity so that

agencies as well as individuals are better able to

take charge of their future.

PARTICIPATORY APPROACHESGenerally participation begins with courtesy calls

to local leaders and discussions leading to a con-

sensus that there are problems of concern to the

community, and that examining their causes could

be beneficial to all.

The next step depends on the degree to which one

is committed to participation. Pioneers of the partic-

ipatory approach insist that the development profes-

sional step into the shoes of the villager or whoever

is experiencing the problem. If this means that a day

or a week is spent fetching wood, carrying water,

building a local house, repairing a local road—then

that is precisely what the development professional

must do. This exercise shows the villager that the


Participatory development assumes that a diverse group of stakeholders bringssufficient wisdom—technical, social, and political—to produce a sound project.

19

“expert” is imperfect, and that the villager, too, has

expertise that he can teach to the technical specialist.

This helps the two meet as equals.

Living the village life also shows the technical

specialist just how difficult that life is, and that

suggestions for improvement need to be tempered

with humility. GreenCOM has used exercises in

workshops that simulate this activity and show all

the concerned parties that each person’s knowledge

and opinion is valuable.

LEVELING THE FIELDParticipatory exercises are relatively simple but

require patience and skilled facilitation. In the Fez

case, GreenCOM used team-building exercises and

ice-breakers to raise the comfort level of partici-

pants, ensure everyone’s participation, and guide

participants to recognize the validity of the points

of view of others in the room, despite differences in

role and social status. For instance, while the room

was originally set up with the government officials

seated on a raised dais, the facilitators brought

everyone down to one level, literally, and rein-

forced cross-role communication by dividing peo-

ple into discussion groups randomly.

To prohibit prominent participants from domi-

nating the discussion, ground rules included not

allowing anyone to speak a second time until

everyone had spoken once.

While the men at the meeting forbade the pres-

ence of neighborhood women, workshop organiz-

ers saw to it that women’s voices were included.

Women interviewers solicited women’s views, and

when they were presented, it was clear to all that

women’s knowledge filled in many gaps in the

record. The information from women was thus

used as an object lesson showing the improved per-

formance that results from inclusion.

Many participatory techniques emphasize visual

methods for drawing people out and promoting

discussion. Rather than individual sources of infor-

mation, such as surveys, they focus on group activ-

ities that generate shared visual representations

such as maps of forest boundaries; charts ranking

social and economic status within a community;

maps of irrigation, time-lines of land-use, and so

forth. The tools do not depend on literacy. Each

tool looks at information in a different way. Use of

multiple tools provides a way to cross check data.

PARTICIPATORY ENVIRONMENTALRESEARCH METHODSIn addition to facilitated discussions, many tools

exist to help groups obtain information, analyze it,

and make decisions. The following examples will

pertain to a sub-objective of improving or building

irrigation canals to increase agricultural output.

MappingBy walking through the territory and performing a

group map-making exercise, participants can con-

tribute and gather a great deal of information

about possibilities, trade-offs, and concerns. Maps

show the relationships between various systems,

natural and man-made and illustrate potential

problems and alternative solutions. Mapping is

often the first participatory exercise in a project. In

this non-confrontational and collective experience,

women and other marginalized members of society

may feel freer to express preferences and ideas.

Α map for discussion of irrigation might include:

♦ Natural resources (rivers, forests, streams,

meadows, mountains)

♦ Existing infrastructure (roads, railways, elec-

trical lines, sewage, water pipes, garbage sites)

♦ Existing system of canals noting which

require repair, upgrading or maintenance

♦ Water sources from which irrigation canals

would be filled

♦ Location of new canals

♦ Locations of human habitations (houses,

towns or villages)

♦ Location of solid waste disposal sites (tradi-

tional or formal)

♦ Location of fallow land and land not cur-

rently under agriculture that might be used

for expansion


Women interviewers solicited women’s views, and when they were presented, it wasclear to all that women’s knowledge filled in many gaps in the record.

20

♦ Traditional (ancient) water catchment basins

and canals

♦ Where aquifers flow below ground and where

water is surface water

♦ Cattle/sheep pasture land

♦ Where women obtain domestic water.

The following comments on mapping come

from the final report of the Nepal video letter

project:

The production of the map was definitely a col-lective endeavor: boundaries and river markerswere discussed, erased and drawn again; eachmember brought an object to mark his/her house;groups went off to collect red mud for drawing.When the map was complete, the specialized rep-resentation triggered in nearly every participantsmind a different issue as they could situate theirown homes and daily concerns within a larger…context. Many commented that they were amazedby how many issues they were able to pin downall at once by making and then consulting…themap. They also found this exercise to be more funthan simply talking or walking, and their interac-tions with one another become more direct.*

Transect MapsThe transect shows the topography of the land in

relation to land usage. It shows where ecological

sub-zones might require greater care and attention,

where soil loss may be greatest and where gravity

flow irrigation will and will not work. A transect

map for irrigation could indicate:

♦ Hills and mountain areas

♦ Streams and drainage

♦ Gradient and timber line (if appropriate)

♦ Crop production in the various zones

♦ Other land uses (e.g. dwellings or human

habitation, dams).

Seasonal CalendarsWhen it comes to irrigation, seasonality is particu-

larly important. A group exercise might yield, for

example:

♦ Data on cropping patterns by season

♦ Times of maximum use and availability of

water

♦ Times of minimum use and availability of

water

♦ Tasks of men, tasks of women

♦ Data on planting and harvesting.

Time-Line/Historical ProfilesHistorical profiles in irrigation can help a commu-

nity better understand its own use of water. The

time periods can be vast, as in a comparison of

Roman irrigation and agricultural methods with

contemporary methods. Or a time line could cover

a generation, marking important episodes recalled

by the community. A time line might note, for

example,

♦ Major migration patterns in and out of the

village

♦ Years of flood, drought, epidemics

♦ Deaths of leading figures

♦ Harvest celebrations or other celebrations

and festivals; religious holidays

♦ Completion of construction of major monu-

ments such as the village mosque or commu-

nity center

♦ War or other conflicts.

Trend LinesIt is important that the community understand

trends that affect their resources. Such trends range

from changes in rainfall to shifts in market oppor-

tunities. Economic and social differences can be

highlighted, for instance if rich farmers feel that

productivity has been constant, but poor farmers

do not. Trends are represented as graphs or visual

charts after plotting the amounts over several

years. Research on irrigation might spotlight trends

over time in such areas as:


*Nepal: Environmental Education and Communication—Envi-ronment and Forest Enterprise Activity (EFEA), GreenCOMFinal Report, November 1998.

21

♦ Crop production

♦ Soil loss and fertility

♦ Rainfall

♦ Land cover

♦ Forest loss or reforestation

♦ Population

♦ Employment, for men and for women.

MatricesMatrices can be used to explore any subject. For

example a historical matrix for irrigation might be

a chart indicating the following items at three

points in time: before, during, and after a war:

♦ Land under irrigation

♦ Size of land holdings and ownership

♦ Kind of crops under cultivation

♦ Amount of cultivated land

♦ Amount of fallow land.

A classification matrix might show natural

resource use by category of individual over the past

year. The vertical axis could indicate land use (food

or cash crop production, sheep or cattle ranching,

natural forest, wood lots), while the horizontal axis

represents categories of individuals (women, men,

youth, adults, poor, rich) who use that land.

A conflict matrix looks at the various users of the

resource and tries to indicate where conflict may

have arisen in the past year or two years. In irriga-

tion, possible causes of dispute might be where

water is used by the person at the head of the canal

leaving little for those at the tail. It could be about

landowners who do not maintain the portion of the

canal that crosses their land, thus limiting the flow

of water to others below them. It can be caused by

one village maintaining ownership of the water and

limiting its use by other villages in time of drought.

Again each box records the actual frequency of such

conflicts so that they can be prioritized.

Pie ChartsPie charts are a simple way of visualizing informa-

tion and can show, for example, the proportion of

a farm family’s time spent in planting, or time spent

irrigating. A pie chart could dramatically show the

proportions of women’s and men’s labor involved

in irrigation or obtaining household water.

RankingRanking is a way of classifying information and

prioritizing sensitive information and is often used

to initiate an activity prior to using another partic-

ipatory tool. For example, when studying the pro-

portion of land ownership by rich people and poor

people, it may be necessary to do an exercise with

a pie chart to determine who is rich and who is

poor in a village. The criteria for determining

wealth should be determined by the community

itself and is often an occasion for dynamic debate.

Sometimes ownership of material things (a bicycle,

a car, a tractor, sheep, cattle, etc.) is counted to

measure wealth. Sometimes ownership of land is

counted. Whatever the criteria, it should be

decided by the community. Ranking is a simple

way of asking a community to limit its choices to

those things that are the most important to all of

them.

CONTINUING THE PROCESSCreating maps, time-lines, trend-lines, and sea-

sonal charts—these help a community collect and

sort relevant information, and prioritize it. Once

sufficient information is generated, it is orally and

publicly analyzed, and solutions are proposed. For

implementation, participation implies self-directed

development and communities are expected to

exhaust their own resources in terms of manpower,

money and materials, before asking for external

assistance.

POTENTIAL PITFALLSWestern-trained experts look at development

through a particular mental model and ask the

questions dictated by that model. Other people’s

mental models are shaped by their own training

and experience, which is why it is important that


Ranking is a simple way of asking a community to limit its choices to those things thatare the most important to all of them.


the research questions that lead to the design of a

project or program be framed by the local commu-

nity and not by the development expert. No matter

how skilled the experts, they cannot presume to

stand in the shoes of the client.

To the extent that s/he asks for particular infor-

mation, the technical specialist still controls the

development agenda. This control may satisfy

donor concerns for accountability, but it continues

to skew the process of development.

Another pitfall is that, in reality, participation is

extremely difficult to get—and will never approach

100 percent. Development specialists will do well,

though, to try to include at least representatives of

the most concerned groups.

Finally, participation may not always be the

most useful route to take. Legislation and regula-

tion can be more direct and efficient. Communica-

tion activities can then focus on compliance.

In sum, useful participation is less a matter of

applying techniques, methods and approaches,

than of an attitude that values the views of all who

are directly affected by a project.

Western-trained experts look at development through a particular mental model andask the questions dictated by that model.


Everywhere in the developing world, women play

crucial environmental roles: farmer, sylvicultural-

ist, gatherer and distributor of water, fuel, fodder,

and traditional medicines. Women not only use

natural resources; they manage and protect them as

well. So women’s participation in environmental

project planning can make the difference between

success and failure.

In the past, women often participated in envi-

ronmental projects only as volunteer helpers. Plan-

ners assumed that simply working on a project

would advance women’s interests. In reality, since

men tend to dominate decision-making in local

government and community-based organizations,

women’s needs were ignored, and women benefited

little from projects like these.

WHEN GENDER ANALYSISIS MISSINGAn example of what can happen in the absence of

gender analysis comes from Madagascar. Policies

there explicitly acknowledged the need to work

closely with communities to maintain local interest

and offset the loss of income resulting from park

establishment. Buffer zone strategies would pro-

vide alternative employment for communities. But

no gender research guided the development of the

program.

Madagascar officials hired men as salaried guards

or foresters in the park or the newly created Associ-

ation of Tourist Guides. When men became salaried

employees, they passed the work on their family agri-

cultural plots to women, adding to the women’s bur-

den. Program planners asked few questions about

where women would get fuel and water once tradi-

tional sources in the park became off-limits, or about

how much more time it would take. They failed to

consider where women, often the traditional healers

for the community, would obtain the herbs and

medicinal products that they used to get in the

forests, or whether the income from traditional

medicines or forest products would disappear. They

also failed to find out which tasks the women would

have to neglect to carry out these additional burdens.

(Often, it turned out, women had to cut their time

with young children, meaning older daughters had to

assume family responsibility earlier.)

This example indicates some of the gender ques-

tions that environmental education and communi-

cation (EE&C) research should ask at the begin-

ning of the project planning or policy formulation

process. Such research can bridge the gap between

planners, policy makers, and stakeholders, and can

help ensure a successful and equitable policy or

project (see Box 4.1).

The tools of gender analysis distinguish between

practical and strategic gender needs of women:

Practical gender needs are concerned with inad-

equacies in living conditions such as water provi-

sion, health care, and employment. Practical gen-

der needs do not challenge the gender divisions of

labor or women’s subordinate position in society

(Moser, 1993).

Strategic gender needs, on the other hand, relate

to gender divisions of labor, power, and control

and include issues like legal rights, domestic vio-

lence, equal wages, and women’s control over their

bodies. Meeting strategic gender needs helps

women achieve greater equality by changing exist-

ing roles and challenging women’s subordinate

position (Moser, 1993).

Chapter 4Gender Matters

Mona Grieser and Barbara Rawlins

24

“ENGENDERING“ EE&C PROGRAMSIntegrating gender concerns starts with under-

standing gender roles. After exploring the differ-

ent spheres of men and women, we can ask vital

questions about the impact and equity of a new

program. By changing how people do things, will

men or women be more affected? Who will get

more, or less, work? Who will get more, or less,

money? Who will get more, or less, power or sta-

tus? Who will get any new jobs? Who will lose

jobs? What in fact constitutes equity in this situ-

ation? Can the community assimilate these

changes, and what will it take to ease the transi-

tion? (see Box 4.2).

Gender analysis helps us get more and better

information about people’s knowledge, attitudes,

and behaviors. Again and again we’ve found that a

gender component helps us design better programs

that further both environmental protection and

equity. But using gender analysis in a meaningful

way entails more than disaggregation of data. Gen-

der awareness plays a part in each step of needs

assessment, research, planning, implementing, and

evaluation (see Box 4.3).

GENDER-SENSITIVE NEEDS ASSESSMENTWhen investigating an environmental problem in a

community, it is essential to solicit the views of

men and women independently to assess their

needs and concerns. Women often hesitate to

express opinions when both sexes are present, and

males tend to dominate the conversation. It is

therefore advisable to interview women alone or in

groups of other women using female interviewers

and moderators.

Data should be collected from equal numbers of

men and women (disaggregated) using gender-sen-

sitive techniques and a mix of research methods.

But the most basic precaution a researcher must

take is to ensure that the methods employed, and

the wording of questions, do not bias against

women. Methods involving written responses tend

to be biased against women, who generally have

less education than men. Additionally, research

conducted when women may be unavailable also

excludes them.

Non-traditional research methods can expose

problems that may not emerge from either

quantitative (surveys) or qualitative (focus

group) research. Such methods include partici-

patory exercises, use of traditional media (dra-

mas, songs created by women), modern technol-

ogy such as videos or Polaroid cameras, etc. (see

Box 4.2).

Qualitative research can contribute towards

developing a quantitative survey that is gender-

sensitive and better tailored to the local situation.

Initial qualitative research can:

♦ Identify gender issues that local people think

are important

♦ Identify the language people use to describe

their opinions and concerns


The most basic precaution a researcher must take is to ensure that the methodsemployed, and the wording of questions, do not bias against women.

Gender analysis was integrated into all

GreenCOM’s programs in El Salvador.

For example, one study examining the

use of fuel wood by rural populations indi-

cated that two gender-linked reasons drove the

high demand for fuel wood:

While women primarily used wood for

household fuel, they did so at the direc-

tion of their husbands, who expected that

freshly made tortillas would always be

available. The fire must be kept stoked to

be able to make these tortillas. Husbands’

ideas of a warm and loving atmosphere

in the home included the constant pres-

ence of a lit hearth.

Based on these findings, GreenCOM

worked with women to promote fuel-efficient

stoves and prepared messages for men that

addressed their concerns as well.

BOX 4.1

How Gender Research CanShape Project Design

25

♦ Assess the difficulty of discussing the environ-

mental issue of interest with community

members.

The household, in its myriad cultural forms, is

generally viewed as the basic unit of social organi-

zation and often used as the unit of analysis when

conducting quantitative social science research. But

domestic gender relations are often characterized

by an unequal distribution of power favoring

males, mirroring broader gender inequities in polit-

ical influence and access to resources that are struc-

turally entrenched.

Males and females in the same household may

not only have divergent environmental priorities

but also separate avenues for effecting change. It

may be useful to conduct intra-household research,

by independently interviewing at least one male

and female from the same home and comparing

their views, in addition to comparing men and

women across households.

VARIABLES IN GENDER ANALYSISStudying the variables listed below may help pro-

gram planners develop a better understanding of

women’s triple roles (productive, community man-

agement, and reproductive) and men’s dual roles

(productive, community management) and how

these roles might affect their receptivity to, partici-

pation in, and benefits from EE&C interventions


In Egypt, GreenCOM used

video to capture male and

female farmers discussing

ideas for cleaning up the local

irrigation ditches (mesqas) and

for resolving other community

issues. In one village research

helped define a communications

intervention to encourage farm-

ers to organize themselves to

clean up mesqas.Focus group discussions

were held with four groups of

adults responsible for making

farming decisions: women

under 40 years; women over

40; men under 40; and men

over 40. In-depth interviews

were conducted with 21 key

informants, including the

deputy mayor, supervisors from

the cooperative, the village doc-

tor, the Iman, the irrigation

inspector, the irrigation engi-

neer, members of the village

council, and male and female

farmers. The discussions and

interviews covered the largest

problems facing the village,

opinions about the agricultural

and waste disposal systems, the

amount and quality of water in

the mesqa, social issues such as

village gatherings, community

actions, health care in the vil-

lage, and gender issues such as

women’s work.

The innovative part of this

research was the use of a video

camera as a research tool. The

resulting video was critical to

developing an understanding of

the attitudes, perceptions, and

behavior of farmers and key

informants, to identify barriers

and ways to overcome them.

The video also helped deter-

mine what action the commu-

nity would take regarding the

maintenance and improvement

of mesqas. Finally, the video

communicated these findings to

national government ministers.

For the first time, village

women had a direct link to

national policymakers—who

listened to their concerns. What

the women revealed in this film

was that mesqas were clogged

because women did not have

anywhere else to put the fam-

ily’s garbage. This intervention

helps to demonstrate both the

importance of listening to

women as well as the role of

communications and research

techniques in facilitating com-

munity action for environmen-

tal improvement.

BOX 4.2

Making Voices Heard: Video Communicates Women’s Messages to Policymakers


(Pfannenschmidt and McKay, 1997). The variables

are intended to help assess both women’s practical

and strategic gender needs (also see Box 4.3).

Variables of potential interest, depending on

site-specific needs, include:

Personal Characteristics♦ Age

♦ Occupation

♦ Education

♦ Marital status

♦ Ethnicity

♦ Religion

♦ Seniority in household

♦ Membership in community organizations

♦ Seasonal allocation of time

Missing Information in thePhilippines

In the Philippines, a Green-

COM desktop review of five

local environmental case stud-

ies demonstrated that women’s

subsistence strategies are driven

by the family’s basic need for

food and the barest essentials,

and that they manage their activ-

ities relative to the tasks of other

members of the family. Thus, to

understand women’s roles one

has to understand the roles

played by other members of the

household (Abregana, 1997).

Several information gaps

were identified: there was a lack

of information on women as

resource managers, sources of

information and channels of

communication had not been

adequately identified, and an

intergenerational perspective

was missing—particularly

important in a country that

puts a premium on strong fam-

ily values passed on to the next

generation. Patterns were

emerging that showed women’s

entry into spheres of activities

traditionally handled by men,

such as raising corn. The sea-

sonality of fishing and farming

as related to gender roles was

not adequately explored either.

Gender Differences in Jordan In Jordan, GreenCOM assisted

with a school-to-home water-

conservation project imple-

mented through school-based

environmental youth clubs. Jor-

dan’s sex-segregated schools

were an ideal place to investi-

gate different attitudes and

behaviors between girls and

boys, female and male teachers

and administrators, mothers and

fathers. Preliminary qualitative

research showed that women

sensed a greater personal

responsibility for water conser-

vation than men did—women

offered more alternatives for

saving water and avoiding

waste. In contrast, men per-

ceived the lack of water as a

government problem, blamed

the Israelis, felt entitled to as

much water as they thought

they needed, and evidenced little

personal responsibility for water

use and abuse. In sum, water

was viewed by men as a

women’s issue.

One way of looking at the

data is to assume that if

women’s environmental behav-

ior is more responsible than

men’s, environmental specialists

should focus on women. In

these particular projects, how-

ever, GreenCOM assumed that

bringing men up to the

women’s level of responsibility

would substantially reduce neg-

ative impact on the environ-

ment. Therefore, much of the

curriculum content was

designed to focus on the ways

that men could improve water

conservation in the home, such

as using drip irrigation instead

of a hose in the family garden;

repairing leaky faucets, pipes,

and storage tanks; building

storage tanks for grey water;

putting in simple water catch-

ment facilities for rain runoff;

washing the car with a bucket

of water, not a hose; and turn-

ing off the tap while shaving.

BOX 4.3

Engendering Data Collection

27

♦ Environmental knowledge, attitudes, beliefs, and

practices

Household Characteristics♦ Hierarchy of household

♦ Family size

♦ Number and ages of children

♦ Social class/caste

♦ Gender-based division of labor (adults and children)

♦ Sources of income (including out-migration)

♦ Spending patterns

♦ Financial responsibilities and control

♦ Intra household decision-making/conflict-resolu-

tion processes

♦ Location (rural/urban)

Community/Societal Characteristics♦ Location (rural/urban)

♦ Gender-based access to resources and legal frame-

work (e.g., education, training, information, new

technologies, extension services, administrative

and government services, land tenure, traditional

rights and official ownership laws, credit, infras-

tructure, markets, transportation, labor rights)

♦ Social institutions (relevant existing neighbor-

hood and community groups, including mem-

bership composition and rules)

The information gathered through gender anal-

ysis enables program planners and implementors to

answer the following two questions (World Bank,

1992):

What are the constraints to environmental

action that affect men and women differently?

What are the opportunities for either men or

women in a specific environmental area or

sector?

In deference to the many false expectations cre-

ated in developing countries by previous assess-

ment activities, the purpose for gathering informa-

tion from respondents should be clear from the

outset so that ethical problems may be avoided.

DATA ANALYSIS CONSIDERATIONSGender analysis should describe similarities and

differences between men and women in various

subgroups within the community. It is important

to recognize that women are not a homogenous

group but have differing generational perspectives:

the needs of teenagers are not the same as the

needs of the elderly; single mothers have different

needs from married women. Information on age

can often provide insight into educational attain-

ment by generation and supports arguments for

better access to education for women. (There is

generally a change in knowledge and attitude

across the board between women under and over

26 years old, due to improved access to educa-

tion.) Thus, it is vital to disaggregate information

not only by sex, but also by age categories and

socio-economic status. Based on results of the

analysis, specific EE&C strategies may be devel-

oped for women and men.

Research findings should be shared with respon-

dents. This can be done by drawing them into the

design phase of the program.

DESIGNING AND IMPLEMENTINGTHE PROGRAMEducation and communication programs reaching

women should consider the following key issues:

Literacy: The literacy level of women in devel-

oping countries is often much lower than that of

men. Therefore materials aimed at rural women

need to use minimal text and be appropriately sim-

plified. In addition, words need to be familiar to

women and culturally appropriate.

Language: Women in developing countries are

often less fluent in the national language, speaking

only the dialect in their area. National languages

are introduced into the formal school system after

third grade, by which time many girls have already

dropped out.

Pictorial Convention: Women have far fewer

opportunities to view printed material than men

do. Consequently they are not always familiar

with the conventions associated with pictorial


28

literacy. This includes understanding the

sequence of pictures if more than one picture is

on a page, being distracted by unfamiliar objects

or persons, not personalizing a message if the

pictures are unfamiliar, not understanding com-

mon pictorial conventions such as perspective,

foreshortening, close-ups. These challenges

heighten the need for pretesting materials

directed to a female audience.

Context: Women are socialized from an early

age to submit to peer pressure and to conform to

community norms. If women are to make individ-

ual decisions, they often need the security of know-

ing that their peers are making similar decisions.

Involving women in a group setting is more pro-

ductive, from the communicator’s point of view,

than trying to deal with women individually. Addi-

tionally, women may need some time to come to a

decision, and that may mean consulting with their

husbands or families.

Timing: Timing an event or a training to best

involve women and girls is crucial, since leisure

time for participating in extracurricular activities is

usually not available. Girls have after-school

chores; women have morning and evening chores.

Women have major seasonal responsibilities associ-

ated with farming or hiring out their services to

reach the family’s economic goals. In India, a pro-

ject that looked at women’s time over a period of a

year found only two months in the year when

women could participate in project activities. The

rest of the year, their time was fully engaged.

Commitment: Communicators in EE&C will

readily notice the eagerness of women to involve

themselves in activities that will improve condi-

tions for their families or their communities.

Women will often assume tremendous sacrifices to

assure their families a benefit. By the same token,

however, if women do not perceive an immediate

benefit to their families, they will not commit their

time and efforts to promote a project. In natural-

resources activities, the communicator has the

additional problem of demonstrating to women

that conservation or sustainable use will benefit

their families.

PRETESTING BY GENDERWhether the intervention is a media campaign to

support a technical program, a formal curriculum

for children, or an adult training course, it should

be pretested in three settings: women/girl only

groups; men/boy only groups; and mixed sex

groups. If the needs assessment finds that audiences

should be further segmented, then they should be

segmented for the pretest.

MONITORING AND EVALUATIONCreating appropriate, gender-sensitive indicators of

success is no easy task. Indicators must reflect the

local social and cultural context within which the

project operates. The time-frame within which the

project is implemented and results are expected

must be realistic. For example, indicators may not

focus on environmental outcomes and benefits to

women, but on changes in the local power struc-

ture which may help women’s voices to be heard.

Since many EE&C activities in both rural and

urban areas focus on supporting the development

and strengthening of grassroots organizations to

manage resources, program evaluations should

assess the involvement and role that men and

women have in decision-making within these orga-

nizations. In addition, economic benefits for

women can be especially difficult to measure in

communities where most local income comes

through barter or trade.

Three Measures of Impact♦ Head counts: The number or percent of men and

women who: participate in or are exposed to

project activities, are members of local counter-

part organizations, participate in training, recall

communication messages, perform a specific

behavior, hold positive attitudes and beliefs

about a practice, etc.

♦ Type of benefit: The number or percent of men

and women who joined the Board of Directors;

received allocation titles, obtained salaried jobs,

benefitted from alternative employment

schemes, and so forth.


29

♦ Average benefit by gender: Differences in bene-

fits for female-headed versus male-headed

households.

MonitoringAs the project proceeds, useful questions include:

♦ Are all data disaggregated by sex, age, and socio-

economic status?

♦ Were women employed and trained by the pro-

ject? Did women participate equally with men

and were they paid equally as men?

♦ Were appropriate indicators developed to mea-

sure the on-going impact of the project on men

and women (short-term, medium-term, and

long-term where appropriate)?

♦ Does the project use the extent to which

women’s relations with men have improved as

an indicator of effectiveness?

♦ Are women and men treated with equivalent

respect—both as participants and staff personnel?

♦ Are women and men segmented into different

target audiences? Are there age segments within

groups? Where appropriate, were gender-specific

messages developed for each group and sub-

group?

Impact EvaluationIdeally, after the project has been completed, gen-

der-sensitive indicators that were developed during

the project design phase are either: 1) measured

again to compare with baseline measurements

taken prior to project implementation (pre-

test/post-test design) or 2) are measured in the tar-

get community and a control community to assess

project impact (post-test only design).

Impact evaluation questions are divided into five

categories below, though not all will apply in every

EE&C program.

1. Impact on Gender Equity♦ Has the project increased women’s involvement

in decision-making within their households and

community?

♦ Are their decisions made independently or are

they serving as a proxy for their husbands?

♦ Has the project improved women’s access to,

and control over, social services, environmental

resources, or infrastructural facilities? What new

resources/services are available to them?

♦ What impact has the project had on relation-

ships between men and women?

♦ Has the project increased women’s ability to act

collectively and organize within the community?

♦ Has the project had any influence on the gender-

based division of labor? Has it increased or

decreased the women’s workload?

♦ Has the project improved women’s status in the

community or influenced social norms in any

way?

♦ Are there direct economic benefits for women

resulting from their participation, or the partici-

pation of men, in the project? Are the benefits

reaped by men and women comparable?

2. Policy-Related Impact♦ Has the project strengthened linkages between

research findings on gender issues and the for-

mulation of environmental policies?

♦ What gender-sensitive procedures and policies

have been learned and adopted by local govern-

ment officials?

3. Influence on Local Capacity♦ Has the number of women members of partici-

pating organizations and institutions increased?

♦ Has their attendance/involvement increased or are

they merely serving as proxies for their husbands?

♦ Has the number of women serving as officers in

participating organizations during project imple-

mentation increased?

♦ Has the number of women in participating orga-

nizations and institutions who received technical

or managerial training increased?

4. Changes in Environmental Knowledge,Attitudes, Beliefs and Practices

♦ To what extent has the project impacted envi-

ronmental knowledge differently by gender?


ronmental attitudes differently by gender?




ronmental beliefs differently by gender?


ronmental practices differently by gender?

5. Implications for the Environment andLivelihoods

♦ Has the project enhanced men’s and women’s

roles as environmental managers?

♦ What impact has this had on project participants

access to natural resources and sources of

income?

If a follow-up study is possible, ask:

♦ What are the participation rates for the project

by sex, age and socio-economic group?

♦ Is this an improvement over baseline or control

group measures?

♦ Is the project sustainable? Replicable?

Sometimes our best efforts to seek womens’

opinions are frustrated. What if women don’t come

to group meetings or won’t speak with an inter-

viewer? Experience shows trust is worth the trou-

ble of going the extra mile to seek womens’ per-

spectives (see Box 4.4).

BEYOND PROJECTS: PROMOTINGGENDER-RESPONSIVEENVIRONMENTAL POLICYPolicymakers have long recognized that gender and

environment are inextricably linked and that pro-

grams and projects should formalize that connection.

EE&C can assist in gender-sensitive policy for-

mulation in a number of ways: by promoting and

supporting policy through targeted information

campaigns to policymakers, by creating an ambi-

ence in a country where a particular policy is

favored, by creating feedback loops that allow the

sharing of stakeholder opinions, and finally by

developing fora so that all stakeholders are drawn

actively into the policy formulation process.

In 1995 GreenCOM provided technical assis-

tance to USAID/Niamey to support government-

led land reform. The project recommended ways to

establish a dialogue on land tenure, including a

program to inform women of their rights to own

land, and a communication/education program

showing how women could take advantage of the

opportunity being afforded them by land reform.

A country’s national education policy can also

play a major role in linking gender and environ-

ment. Where policies encouraging women’s access

and participation in formal and non-formal educa-

tion exist, the programs tend to be more sustain-

able than where such policies do not exist. The pol-

icy can provide the framework to infuse

environmental content into gender-sensitive school

curricula, literacy programs, and teacher training.

“ENGENDERING” SCOPES OF WORKNGOs working in EE&C often hire short-term con-

sultants and collaborate with local counterpart

organizations to work with communities in design-

ing and carrying out EE&C programs. Steps must

be taken to ensure that all project staff—permanent

and temporary—understand the need to be gender

sensitive. Beginning with GreenCOM’s first project

in El Salvador, for instance, every consultant hired

by GreenCOM has been asked for specific gender

information related to their scope of work.

References

Abregana, B.C. 1997. Let the Women Speak. The Philippines:GreenCOM Project and the Interdisciplinary Research Unit,College of Arts and Sciences, Silliman University.

Moser, Caroline O.N. 1993. Gender Planning and Develop-ment: Theory, Practice and Training. London and NewYork: Routledge.

Pfannenschmidt, S. and A. McKay. 1997. Through a GenderLens: Resources for Population, Health and Nutrition Pro-jects. Women’s Studies Project, FHI. For the Gender Work-ing Group, Population, Health and Nutrition Center, Wash-ington, DC: USAID.

World Bank. 1992. Gender Information Framework (GIF).Washington, DC: World Bank.


One of USAID’s goals in

Morocco includes the

development of partner-

ships between residents and local

governments to solve urban

problems. A parliamentarian

from Fez proposed an exercise in

partnership development around

the problem of waste manage-

ment in two peri-urban settle-

ments near Fez: Zouagha Haut

and Zouagha Bas. Having only

recently been incorporated into

the urban boundaries of the city,

these neighborhoods received

municipal waste-collection ser-

vices that residents considered

woefully inadequate. Neighbor-

hood associations were trying to

solve the waste-collection prob-

lem, but were hampered by a

lack of coordination with others

in the community.

GreenCOM convened a par-

ticipatory workshop of local

stakeholders, residents, associa-

tion members, and municipal

government officials, to discuss

and agree upon a common

problem-solving strategy. The

workshop participants included

a representative of the executive

branch of government, the par-

liamentarian from Fez, elected

municipal officials, technicians

from the municipality and other

government institutions in

charge of urban problems, and

representatives of the neighbor-

hood associations.

Of the 30 participants, only

two were women, an educator

and a government employee.

Neighborhood associations,

whose membership is open only

to men, objected to inviting

women to the meeting at all.

Therefore, female researchers

were sent into the community

to fill the information gaps

identified in the discussions and

to bring the women’s point of

view to the table. Male work-

shop participants interviewed

other stakeholders not present

at the workshop, such as local

officials of Ministry of the Inte-

rior and waste collectors.

The research findings

revealed the importance of

obtaining women’s perspectives

on the problem. Women said

that they were paying the waste

collectors, though they are not

association members. Women

often do not know that waste

collectors work for the neigh-

borhood association. Women

described how waste collectors

are impolite and/or refuse to

collect waste when there is a

short delay in paying the waste-

collection fee. Good records of

who pays and who does not are

not kept. Waste collectors may

come more than once in the

same month to collect the fee.

An action plan was devel-

oped, including a working com-

mittee composed of stakehold-

ers. To incorporate gender

concerns, a female social pro-

moter and a local project advi-

sor also became members of

this committee, and the com-

munication and education com-

ponent included the develop-

ment of social networks for

women and training for women

in development issues.

BOX 4.4

What Happens if You Can’t Involve Women as You’d Like?


As professionals addressing environmental educa-

tion and communications, we occasionally tackle

discrete problems. However, more often we con-

front the needs of an entire company, community,

country, or ecosystem.

When GreenCOM is called in to “fix” a situation,

we often find that the real need is broader than com-

munication and education. We find that the whole

human dimension to a project, program, or policy is

missing. People have been left out of the process.

Those regulated have not been told what regulations

they are subject to. Peoples’ use of resources may

have been restricted without involving them in that

decision. By the time we arrive, policies have been

conceived and in some cases implemented; infras-

tructure has been built; the resource has been

depleted without considering the needs or opinions

of the stakeholders. We are asked to “sell” a com-

pleted—and often inappropriate—program with our

education and communication project.

For these situations, some of us are experiment-

ing with tools from the field of cybernetics, or

“general theory of systems,” which deal with the

entire spectrum of complex systems. We have for-

mulated a set of principles designed to help us

quickly assess a new system and effectively apply

what we know from other complex systems.

The concepts presented in this chapter have

proven useful in describing, modeling, model test-

ing, and then reaching policy conclusions and

forming communications strategies.

BACKGROUND OF GENERALTHEORY OF SYSTEMSOver the past few decades a number of scientific

fields have made efforts to understand very com-

plex systems: the universe in physics, cell function

in biology, atmospheric reactions involved in cli-

mate change in chemistry. As researchers began to

describe and understand these complex systems,

they realized that they might understand their sys-

tems better if they compared them with other—

seemingly unrelated—systems. They discovered

some general principles of complex systems that

can help us more quickly understand a new system.

Because this set of principles is derived from a

multitude of disciplines, it may seem hard to apply

at first. This chapter tries to make the principles

more concrete by applying them to a GreenCOM

case study in environmental communications from

El Salvador. We hope it will help stimulate you to

apply this effective new tool for examining com-

plex systems with complex problems, including

those in environment and development.

Over the past 25 years much of the material in

this chapter has been presented in other media by

the authors; we hope that this shortened version will

be helpful to those in environmental education and

communications. GreenCOM hopes to develop this

tool further to make it more helpful to practitioners.

APPLYING SYSTEMS THINKINGIN EL SALVADORIn the 1990s, El Salvador surfaced from years of civil

war with practically no social infrastructure. The

education system and the natural and built environ-

ments of El Salvador were in ruins. As USAID re-

entered the country it addressed many severe prob-

lems. Wisely, USAID understood that environmental

education would help the population rebuild its nat-

ural resources including forests and fresh water that

were the basis of the country’s economy.

Chapter 5Addressing the Social Dimension: An Application of Systems Thinking

Robbin R. Hough and Brian A. Day

34

USAID’s global Environmental Education and

Communication Project, known as GreenCOM,

began a five-year, multi-million dollar effort in this

decimated country. We used the general theory of sys-

tems—including the 10 principles described below—

as a guide to help determine how to begin work.

10 PRINCIPLES OF A GENERALTHEORY OF SYSTEMS

1. A concrete living system is made up of objects that

as a population constitute the mass of the system.

The first step is to clarify the components of the

system. Systems are composed of objects. A living

system is made up of objects such as atoms,

molecules, cells, organisms, people, groups, organi-

zations and communities. In a living system, the

“objects” are themselves decision-making systems.

Our studies of living systems can begin with the

demography, by examining age distributions, birth

rates, death rates, and migration rates. Under-

standing, however, must go beyond demography to

insights into the collective wisdom, mores, and

decision-making processes.

In El Salvador, the system we were targeting wasthe entire population. Because of our focus onenvironmental behavior, we were more concernedwith attitudes and behaviors than with ages orgrowth rates. Our first step in creating an environ-mental education (EE) campaign was to assess thepopulation’s knowledge, attitudes and practicesregarding the environment. We did so through sur-veys and interviews.

2. A system is part of a hierarchy of systems, made

up of subsystems and supra-systems.

Systems are made up of subsystems. In turn, each

system is also a subsystem of a larger system or

supra-system. (Some people may relate more easily

to the concept of “nested” systems.) Atoms are

subsystems of molecules, which are subsystems of

cells. In society, institutions are subsystems of the

community; communities are subsystems of states

or provinces, which are subsystems of nations.

In the El Salvador case, we identified strategic sub-systems of the population. We chose teachers, stu-dents, and journalists, all subgroups capable ofinfluencing other subgroups at various levelswithin the system.

3. All living systems are defined as objects in cou-

pled motion.

Every system has objects in coupled motion. Think

of the predator—prey relationship in ecology. Or

the image of dance partners. We can call them

“teamed objects in balance.” Identifying these

teamed objects and understanding what creates the

balance between them is key to understanding the

nature of the system. A system often contains many

teamed objects.

The most salient example in El Salvador was thepublic-private partnership. In order to deliver infor-mation and materials to our target audiences asquickly and efficiently as possible, we paired ourenvironmental knowledge with the national news-paper’s ability to print and disseminate to a largeaudience. As one result, the newspaper, El Diario deHoy, created a multi-page, full color, once-a-monthinsert for children. The insert arrives with the Sun-day paper, and each issue spotlights one environ-mental topic. The insert is named El Guanaquin,after a little armadillo turned into a spokes-mascotfor EE; more than 60 issues have appeared so far.

4. Living systems receive energy inputs from out-

side. Thus they are open as opposed to closed

systems.

A system’s objects must expend energy to survive.

Living systems must import usable energy (origi-

nally from the sun). We were prompted by this idea

to find the outside sources of “energy” that sustain

our systems.


35

The GreenCOM project imported material andapproaches, which were very useful to students andteachers alike, developed outside El Salvador andheavily adapted them to fit the culture and ecologyof the country.

5. Each subsystem is defined by its capacities for

matter-energy/information input, short-term

storage, metabolism, long-term storage and

output.

In function, subsystems are processors with specific

capabilities. They take in matter-energy or infor-

mation, store it, convert it to other forms, and use

it to do work. Each subsystem performs a special-

ized function necessary to the whole system (e.g.

consumption, reproduction, transportation, or

communications.)

As we address an environmental issue we must

identify the capacities of each subsystem. What

role do they play? How do they sustain themselves

if the resource flows increase or decrease? Can the

officials in office carry out a recommended new

policy? Can local journalists interpret the new pol-

icy to those regulated by it? Can people understand

the political, environmental or financial perspec-

tives? Will special interests such as trade organiza-

tions advocate a course of action? Can the stake-

holders stay active even if the battle is long?

The concepts of short- or long-term storage may

be more easily thought of as the ability to with-

stand increases or decreases in resources—a buffer-

ing capacity. Are these subsystems flexible and

adaptable? or are they fragile and at risk? Environ-

mentally we often see the biological application of

these concepts: fragile ecosystems can be damaged

or obliterated by a severe storm but resilient

ecosystems may spring back the next season. The

social subsystems’ ability to withstand fluctuations

in information or financial flows are just as critical.

Can a fledgling organization manage a big influx of

funding? Can a corrupt government support a

long-term commitment to sustainable forestry?

Capacity development and sustainability are the

ways we have come to think of these questions.

In El Salvador, each element of the strategy—printed materials, broadcast slogans, trainingstrategies for journalists was pre-tested before scal-ing up. Pretesting is a way of testing the capacity ofa subsystem to withstand change. Will new infor-mation given to teachers change the content oftheir lessons? Will information distributed to themedia change the behavior of their readers and lis-teners? If the materials did not have the desiredeffects, how could we improve them before theirgeneral release? Pre-testing thus examines the sys-tem’s capacity for information input, short-termstorage, and metabolism (Day, 1997, Hough1975b, 1996, and Kaplan & Kaplan, 1982).

6. The structure of a system is defined by the sub-

systems it can activate, by the supra-systems

that may activate it, and by the linkages

through which the activations take place. Sub-

systems are activated in response to changes in

other subsystems.

A system’s structure is the total of all the relation-

ships of its subsystems. These relationships are set

by the capacity and connections of the channels

among the subsystems through which matter-energy

or information flows in and products flow out.

Any changes in information, energy, or resource

flows activate various subsystems. For example,

when the human body (a system) is exposed to a

disease, our immune systems (subsystems) are acti-

vated to ward off the threat. Likewise in communi-

ties, when resources—natural or financial—

increase or decrease, a whole set of actors respond

to these opportunities or threats. In countries

where GreenCOM has worked, we have seen a cas-

cade of positive and negative reactions to the mere

presence of the donor resources of money, training,

technical assistance and potential contracts. These

are all natural subsystem responses to a change in

resource flows. We can not only understand these

changes, but also plan our education and commu-

nications activities to address them. For example,

donor resources can distort local salaries and cre-

ate a new social structure. When these resources


36

are withdrawn the project can collapse. We need to

consciously design programs that can continue

without outside support by putting in place the

knowledge, training, funding skills, and facilities to

allow continuation.

In El Salvador, people needed information aboutwhat was being done by government, the privatesector, and what they needed to do for themselvesto protect the environment. To serve those needs,GreenCOM worked to train a cadre of reporters tocover the environment. The coverage of environ-mental issues not only increased peoples aware-ness, but also increased the relative importancethat both individuals and political leaders gave theenvironment.

By providing additional capacity buildingresource—training to journalists—the relative rela-tionship between a number of subsystems changes.The nature of coupled motion has been changed.

7. A system may use energy inputs to add more

objects, to change the linkages or relationships

among its subsystems, or to produce an output.

A system can choose to use its energy in any of

these three ways. The choice is often determined by

the systems stage of development. Before a system

can grow or develop it must have the critical mass

of objects. As it grows further it develops relation-

ships with other subsystems (coupled motion).

After growing larger it can produce more products.

(Hough, 1975). When examining international

development issues, many focus on increasing the

production of products. But the strength of a soci-

ety is its ability to sustain the relationships that

provide its own continuity—the relationships

between subsystems—developing the important

coupled motion that allows for sustainability.

Training, a form of capacity-building, is one way to

improve the relationship between subsystems—of

orchestrating the nature of coupled motion. A sys-

tem that becomes more efficient in its use of energy

and information may be able to produce more

products without a great deal of growth.

An example of how an energy input changed thelinkages among subsystems is an environmental edu-cation training workshop for 5,000 teachers in ElSalvador. The workshop included demonstrations ofinteractive methods of teaching. These, methods,when put into practice in the classroom changed therelationships between teachers and students.

8. Growth creates form.

A system’s form is its outward appearance. When a

system grows, its form changes. If growth takes

place as an increase in the population of objects,

the system becomes larger and requires more

energy inputs to sustain these objects. If growth

comes from changes in the relationships among

teamed objects, then the system may not become

physically larger, but new subsystems are devel-

oped with new capacities and complexities.

Growth and change in form can cause confusion

among objects and subsystems until a new order is

established. For instance, the growth of the Inter-

net during the 1990s created some confusion

among computer systems managers. Some man-

agers thought their mainframes would be over-

whelmed by the rapidly growing message flows.

However, the growth took a different form. Rather

than relying on centralized mainframes and dumb

terminals, computer systems have become com-

prised of decentralized servers and intelligent ter-

minals all of which interact with the Internet.

Another example of the second type of growthdescribed above—in which growth comes fromchanges in relationships among subsystems, comesfrom El Salvador. When journalists were trained inenvironmental issues, they responded by creating anew institution: an association of environmentaljournalists. Hundreds of articles on the environ-ment now appear in print and broadcast each year.The association holds a national awards ceremonyfor the best environmental articles published eachyear; the ceremony is attended by up to 800 people.

As the public became better informed by thisincreased press coverage, a popular movement



developed. The energy of this movement wasfocused in a “national encounter” for environmen-tal education, bringing together 1,000 people fromall walks of life to help set policy for a nationalenvironmental education strategy.

9. If a system’s energy exports exceed its energy

imports the system is entropic.

While a system may operate on stored energy for a

time, if less energy is coming in than going out, the

long-term will see vital maintenance tasks ignored,

with resulting losses of objects, links among the

objects and/or coupled motion. The system becomes

stressed by the loss of the channels through which

matter-energy/information is received or by the

inability of an internal subsystem to sustain its cou-

pled motion. Most biodiversity concerns and non-

renewable resource questions are concerns about

entropy, or the death rate or use rate exceeding the

birth rate of objects in the system.

Inputs provided by an international donor in theform of training, materials development, and orga-nizational skills all serve to offset the tendencytoward entropy. We also involved both public andprivate sectors, so that when the project ended, theprocesses and products will live on. Often involve-ment of the private sector will lead to the sustain-ability of a project because the firm has additionalincentives to keep the project going. El Guanaquin,

for example, is now free standing due to financialinputs from the private sector. The national envi-ronmental journalism awards, originally project-based, held a successful first annual event withoutdirect project involvement.

10. Structure limits growth.

In centralized systems, the distribution of products

depends on the processing capacity of a single, cen-

tral object. In decentralized systems, distribution

may be achieved in many ways without using any

single component of the system. Every structure

comes with its own limits and needs for sustain-

ability. Devising structures that can sustain systems

is what we are all trying to do. Where can provid-

ing the right information in the form of education

or communications support the system? This is

what we are trying to learn.

To increase growth, the system must be decentral-ized, with many subsystems engaged. In El Sal-vador, we managed to enhance the effectiveness ofthe EE campaign by engaging multiple subsys-tems—media, teachers, students. Monitoring andevaluation steps told us how well this worked. Weran separate evaluations of effectiveness amongschoolchildren, teachers, and the general public.

Using this set of principles requires one to back

away from the details and see the broad view. It

offers the potential to identify new windows of

opportunity to improve environmental problems. As

mentioned elsewhere in this book, human or social

portions of environmental problems are often over-

looked in the process of protecting a reef, a wetland,

a watershed or an endangered population. Nearly all

environmental problems are human behavior prob-

lems. As human beings ourselves, we needs to back

away from daily details to really understand why

people behave as they do. People usually have very

good reasons for why they do what they do. Often,

a good systems analysis of the situation will offer

surprising and effective options for solutions.

References

Day, B.A. (1997.) Keeping Resources from Collapse: Using aSystems Perspective for Strategic Communications,Advances in Sociocybernetics and Human Development,Vol. V. Canada.

Hough, R.R. (1975.) “A Paradigm for the Application of aGeneral Theory of Systems,” General Systems and Organi-zation Theory in Arlyn Melcher (ed.), Kent State Univ. Press.

Hough, R.R. (1996.) Doomsday, The Internet, Diversity andSustainability, Systems Research, Vol. 13 No. 3, pp.287–292.

Kaplan, S. and Kaplan R. (1982.) Cognititon and Environ-ment: Functioning in an Uncertain World, Praeger NewYork, republished by Ulrich’s, Ann Arbor, 1989.

section 1 - envcomm.orgenvcomm.org/pdf/section1.pdf · as educators have long believed (hines,...

Documents